RE: [xri-editors] Feedback on rc1d

["Sakimura, Nat" <n-sakimura@nri.co.jp>]

+3 

Actually, since many identifier can actually point to the same thing, 
equivalence comparison at the identifier level is not that important 
for me :-)

Nat 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Drummond Reed [mailto:drummond.reed@onename.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2003 4:12 AM
> To: Wachob, Gabe; Dave McAlpin; xri-editors@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [xri-editors] Feedback on rc1d
> 
> +2
>  
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wachob, Gabe [mailto:gwachob@visa.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 10:59 AM
> To: 'Dave McAlpin'; Wachob, Gabe; xri-editors@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [xri-editors] Feedback on rc1d
>  
> +1
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave McAlpin [mailto:dave.mcalpin@epokinc.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 10:56 AM
> To: 'Wachob, Gabe'; xri-editors@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [xri-editors] Feedback on rc1d Good, I wanted to 
> rephrase that sentence anyway. Right now we have "Even though 
> these rules are RECOMMENDED and not REQUIRED, an 
> implementation that fails to observe them may experience an 
> unacceptably high number of false negatives."
>  
> I'd like to change it to "To reduce the requirements on a 
> minimally conforming processor, the majority of these rules 
> are RECOMMENDED rather than REQUIRED. An implementation that 
> fails to observe them, however, may frequently treat two XRIs 
> as nonequal when in fact they are equal."
>  
> Does that sound ok?
>  
> Dave
>  
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wachob, Gabe [mailto:gwachob@visa.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 10:41 AM
> To: 'xri-editors@lists.oasis-open.org'
> Subject: [xri-editors] Feedback on rc1d
>  
> dsr21: "may experience an unacceptably high numberof false 
> negatives" - its not clear what "false negatives" means in 
> this context. I would say "may frequently treat two XRIs as 
> nonequal when if fact they are equal."
>  
> section 2.2.4.2 has a cross reference to section 0 - clearly 
> this is wrong. 
>  
> Nothing else jumps out at me - though I've focused mostly on changes.
> Reviewing old unchanged text tends to be less effective 
> because of my familiarity with it. Things always slip by - 
> time for more eyes!!! 
>  
>     -Gabe
>  
>   _____  
> 
> 
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from 
> the roster of the OASIS TC), go to 
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/xri-editors/membe
> rs/leave_workgroup.php.
> 
> 
>